Karen and I agree with Richard Lewthwaite.
Wrong in principle. The quest for international uniformity in common names is wrong in principle. For international uniformity we use the scientific nomenclature.
Common names are for common usage, and this means common to the layman in the cultural and linguistic context in which the name has become used and familiar.
Alienating. Secondly, common names reflect familiarity, local knowledge and names and affection for local species. To impose uncommon internationalized names and spellings will have adverse effects. It will alienate us from our birds and local literature by the use of alien names. It is directly contrary to the prime purpose of a common name. It is artificial to invent a name to replace an existing valid common name, and then call it common.
Who decides? Common names can change over time and usage and by consensus, but certainly not by imposition.
Having lived with and used some of these names for about half a century, I consider the old names to be part of my natural heritage and would be most unhappy with the changes being discussed.
yours sincerely,
Ruy Barretto
